Opinion| Mark Sidney| Just in case you were sick of winning (we’re not, and I am betting that the majority of America is not either), Elizabeth Warren has a plan for you.

In the next wave of attack on our nation’s ability to compete economically, the Democrats seem to have transitioned to using the ‘imminent’ threat of catastrophic global disaster, which many Dems suggest will be the end of life as we know it on Planet Earth.

Recall what the former Democrat poster child, Ocasio-Cortez, told America, and the world about the end being near:

”The world is going to end in 12 yearsif we don’t address climate change,’ Ocasio–Cortez says The youngest woman ever elected to Congress again made headlines and sparked conservative criticism when she said Monday that she and other young Americans fear “the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.’

AOC later tried to walk back this absurdity, but her desperation, and her use of the same conspiracy theory scare tactics that the left has been employing for the last half a century or so, is very telling.

When I was in school in the ’90s, we were traumatized and terrified into believing that ‘acid rain’ and a hole in the ozone layer were existential threats to our planet.

NASA says Earth’s ozone hole near the south pole is the smallest since it was discovered in 1985′

So excuse me if I am a little skeptical when Marxist, elitist, lying-their-pants-off, academics, who bitch about the price of a college education being too high while getting paid hundreds of thousands to teach a single class (and do research & be a ‘campus leader,’ according to Facebook ‘fact-checker,’ Politifact), try to tell me we can not grow the standard of living because the world is going to end. All while complaining about the standard of living and the cost to live being too damn high.

Because of the way the ‘thought police’ at Facebook work, I want to be very clear that Politifact insists that the claim that Warren was paid over 400k a year to teach a single class is not true, because, among other excuses (which you can read about here), err reasons: ‘In fact, a 2017 study from the National Bureau of Economic Research concluded that, for university professors, “salaries are determined principally by research output and associated reputation,” rather than the number of students the professor teaches.’

Personally, I do not see how this takes away from the fact that arrangements like Warren’s at Harvard are likely a large contributing force to the ever-rising cost of a college education. This seems to be a common thread among the left nowadays. They complain about certain problems, and then present ‘solutions’ which further exacerbate the very problems they claim to be seeking to solve.

For instance, Warren recently told Mr., ‘I dunno how this dead intern showed up in my office,’ Joe Scarborough, that she was willing to halt all construction of new homes if builders could not jump through her hoops.

“That means we’ve got to be willing to do things, for example, like regulation. By 2028, no new buildings, no new houses … without a zero carbon footprint.” Warren boasted.

Now, I wonder what this would do to housing costs … just kidding, I don’t wonder, I know. It restricts supply and has no effect on increasing demand, so it will cause housing prices to rise. By how much, I do not know, no one does, not even the brilliant and humble professor Warren.

Well, at least cars and trucks will still be affordable … well, not if Ms. Warren gets her way.

So much for that idea, this too would be a restriction on supply and cause prices to … you guessed it … increase.

For someone who cares so much about ‘poor people,’ I fail to understand how her policies are creating a playing field where those who earn less can get a leg up.

Here is the video of her appearance with the man who married the former DS’ capo, Zbigniew Brzezinski’s, daughter’s show:

This all looks to me to be more Hegeliandialectic, or ‘problem, reaction, solution.’

Whether Warren understands what these policies she is proposing would do or not is irrelevant. The Democrat Senator from Taxachusetts is pushing policies that will increase, and in my estimation, drastically increase the cost of living. This will disproportionately harm the poor, as, by definition, they have the least income to spare.

From where I sit, this is Marxism 101. Force people into complete and total dependence on the nanny state.

Ask yourself one question, once everyone is dependent on the superstate, and the superstate no longer needs those people, what do you think will happen to them? Perhaps one should ask Lenin, Stalin, or Mao …